2001 (7) TMI 76 - HC - Income Tax

High Court rules interest on loans with unexplained sources not deductible

The High Court of CALCUTTA ruled in favor of the Revenue, holding that interest on loans with unexplained sources should not be allowed as a deduction. ... Interest on Borrowings, Deduction Issues: Allowability of interest on loans with unexplained sources.Analysis:The High Court of CALCUTTA was presented with a question under section 256(2) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, regarding the justification of allowing interest on loans without adding the principal loan amounts earlier. The case involved the assessment year 1987-88, where the Assessing Officer noted interest claims of Rs. 50,800 paid to various individuals. Upon scrutiny, it was found that the lenders, including minors, had unexplained sources of funds and questionable transactions. The Assessing Officer failed to add these cash credit amounts to the assessee's income but disallowed the interest claimed. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal overturned this disallowance, arguing that if the principal loan amounts were not added, interest should not be denied.The court disagreed with the lower authorities, emphasizing that the lack of explanation for the loan sources should not automatically allow interest deductions. Even if the Assessing Officer erred in not adding the cash credit amounts, it did not justify allowing interest on questionable loans. The court highlighted that when cash credits are deemed bogus, the Assessing Officer should add them back to the assessee's income. The issue at hand was solely about the interest's allowability on these questionable cash credits, not their initial addition to income. Therefore, the court concluded that the interest amount claim should not be deleted due to the Assessing Officer's mistake, and both lower authorities erred in allowing interest deductions on such dubious cash credits.In conclusion, the High Court ruled in favor of the Revenue and against the assessee, holding that interest on loans with unexplained sources should not be allowed as a deduction. The judgment highlighted the importance of proper assessment and the disallowance of deductions on questionable transactions, even if there were errors in the initial assessment process.